Hansen D, Schaffartzik W, Dopjans D, Heitz E, Striebel H W
Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Benjamin Franklin Medical Centre, Free University of Berlin.
Br J Anaesth. 1997 Apr;78(4):366-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/78.4.366.
In this double-blind, randomized study, we have investigated 100 healthy children, aged 3-6 yr. We compared intubating conditions and cardiovascular changes during light halothane anaesthesia and propofol 3 mg kg-1 with those during deep halothane anaesthesia. Light halothane anaesthesia was defined as an end-tidal concentration of 1%, deep halothane anaesthesia as 2%. Intubating conditions were graded according to ease of laryngoscopy, vocal cord position and coughing. There were no statistically significant differences in the assessment of intubating conditions between the two groups; 94% of the children in the 1% halothane-propofol group and 100% of the children in the 2% halothane group had acceptable intubating conditions. Systolic arterial pressure decreased by 13% in the 1% halothane-propofol group compared with 20% in the 2% halothane group (P < 0.01).
在这项双盲随机研究中，我们调查了100名3至6岁的健康儿童。我们比较了轻度氟烷麻醉和3mg/kg丙泊酚时与深度氟烷麻醉时的插管条件及心血管变化。轻度氟烷麻醉定义为呼气末浓度1%，深度氟烷麻醉定义为呼气末浓度2%。根据喉镜检查的难易程度、声带位置及咳嗽情况对插管条件进行分级。两组间插管条件评估无统计学显著差异；1%氟烷-丙泊酚组94%的儿童和2%氟烷组100%的儿童插管条件可接受。1%氟烷-丙泊酚组动脉收缩压下降13%，而2%氟烷组下降20%（P<0.01）。
